Skip to comments.Cease Fire on Animals Streets of New Orleans (Please Sign Petition)
Posted on 09/10/2005 11:21:16 PM PDT by BagCamAddict
click here to read article
And they currently have the greatest power to save the pets.
To indulge myself in a little hypothetical hyperbole, would you refuse to have your life saved from a natrual disaster because of a political principal?
Because the "wrong wing" came to get you?
Dogs don't vote and won't care what "wing" fishes them out of the water and feeds them.
Good lord...can't you come up with a *different* angle to harp on, at least?
And not all of them are kill factories. The Humane Society does alot of euthanizing, but not all do. My breed always tries to rescue our dogs from kill shelters and find permanent homes for them. But there are "no-kill" shelters out there. Shades of gray, of course.
Your post is completely irrevelant because we are talking about DOGS in this thread. Not human beings like me.
If SHTF where you live, you feed Fido, evacuate yourself with fido, you be prepared to wok Fido or just waste it to avoid its torture in thirst, famine, filth and lonliness.
Outside of search and rescue personnel, practically *nobody* is equipped for a disaster such as this.
Another diversion from the intention of the efforts.
These people are;
Send -them- money and then you can put your mind at ease.
Welcome to Free Republic. Baiting other posters is a good way to lose your posting privileges.
The fact remains that the OP posted and is promoting a radical left wing extremist site. And you seem to see that as just fine.
I find it offensive to promote the web sites of our enemies. Don't you?
Not like this:
Two on PETA staff charged with cruelty to animals
And lots more...
Look, it's real simple. If these "rescuers" are qualified to operate in the area, they *should* be helping secure the area. If they're not qualified, they shouldn't be in the area.
There is no third way no matter how much hyperbole you pour out.
You get a grip. I'm not going to argue "importance" of dogs vs. children or elderly. I didn't say anything about "importance" so don't put words into my mouth. I said what I meant, which is that we're responsible for their welfare when we bring them into our homes as our pets. And we shouldn't HAVE to choose to rescue or evacuate one OR the other. If a person can't be a responsible pet owner, which includes taking CARE of them, then they shouldn't have pets in the first place. Can you grip that??
You're trapped in Boston?!?
You have my sympathies.
[No wonder you're so punchy]....LOL!
He already knew that information if he signed the petition. So your defense falls flat.
OK, in this case there were pets left behind. Do you feel that rescuing the pets is as important as rescuing the humans?
A simple yes or no will suffice.
Exactly my point. It's not just a triage of people, it's a triage *area*. Unqualilfied people are just going to get themselves and others hurt.
A dog found "running in a pack getting vicious" is one thing. Somebody's cat or dog who always stayed inside (particular cats) is another.
Still on that, are you? Once again, they are not saving animals at the expense of people. I think you have something against animals. Did your daddy give away your dog when you were a child or something?
Some did take their pets and had their pets taken from them to be dropped by the roadside.
What of those people?
Have they no right to weep?
And to clarify things a bit, I am furious at those who had the means to move their pets but figured "it'll only be a couple of days and we'll be back".
I'm also p*ssed at those who had exceptionally ample warning; enough time, in fact, to -walk- out if they had no other way.
If I knew something like that storm was headed my way, I would have -all- my animals gone from here with plenty of time to spare.
There would be no "oh, it'll only be a couple of days" crap, either.
Promote: To attempt to sell or popularize by advertising or publicity
No, I was not "promoting" that website. I was "promoting" that petition. Big difference, in case you hadn't noticed.
But you're too busy "promoting" your anti-lib agenda on this thread to notice that. For your first day posting, one would think you'd be a little less antagonistic. Now I'm done engaging with you. You're not worth my time.
gator time huh?
You are beginning to reek of desperation.
That was so outre´ and obliquely ad hominem as to be almost humorous....:)
And ending on that pathetic note, I believe we are done.
Some fancy semantic dancing there my friend.
click the link for a pic of the statue of "Old Yeller" which was written by Fred Gipson of Mason Texas...just outside the library in Mason...
I sure enough agree with you there. Mine don't get left...period.
It's not like these people are strangers to hurricane activity. We haven't seen a bad one for forty some years, but I'm still ready to bug in less than four hours.
Haven't you figured the Buggy out yet?
It's *not* the principle *or* the issue; it's the frisson of the argument.
BagCamAddict In regards to shelters, Most, if not all shelters have to euthanize, it's just a fact of how shelters work. If your (breeder?) claims they don't, They do, or send them out.
SevenDaysInMay Can't argue with that. People should not be allowed to own pets if they aren't prepared to do everything for them. When they are left to become everyone elses problem then they are dispatched. In this case bullets are cheaper and humane. Fact of life. Another fact is most of these dogs would end up in a shelter and be dispatched anyways. Few will be saved and reunited with their owners, and these organizations will laugh all the way to the bank.
Whoa... that was not an attack my friend.
YOU are the one who said you wanted to use bad language. I based my statement on that.
Press "Ignore" now.
That is soooooooo good!!!!!!
I agree with you.
OK, thanks. I was starting to think I had signed up at the wrong site! LOL
Oh well, the least they could do is admit they are promoting a leftist website.
But I think on my first foray into FR I ran across some characters I will just have to avoid if I want to stay around.
Thank you again. This time with whipped cream and a cherry on top! :-)
What's up with "more cowbell" anyway?
PETA is even willing to see animals killed before they are made proper and humane use of by humans. A classic example of this approach came to light 2003 federal litigation. PETA and other animal-liberationist organizations sued to prevent elephants from being imported from Africa and placed in zoos. The elephants in question were endangering the ecosystem of the world famous Kruger National Park. The court noted that granting the injunction would cause the elephants to be culled rather than save their lives. But the attorney for PETA and its liberationist co-plaintiffs told the court that the pachyderms will be better off if killed rather than imported and placed in zoos.
In a similar vein, in 2002 PETA joined with other animal-rights groups to sponsor a constitutional amendment in Florida that prevented pregnant pigs from being placed in gestation crates, which prevents sows from moving during pregnancy. The groups spent well over $1 million on the project even though Florida was not exactly known as the pig-farm state. With no major pork industry in the state to finance the opposition, and after a one-sided campaign, Floridians voted to grant state constitutional rights to pregnant pigs.
When the smoke cleared, it turned out that only two pig farmers in the entire state utilized gestation crates. Since the measure made their businesses untenable financially, the farmers sent their pigs to immediate slaughter to the general applause of animal liberationists, presumably including PETA. As a representative of the Animal Rights Foundation of Florida put it, In the big picture, we see that as a good thing. Its going to lessen their suffering and hasten the end of their miserable lives.
Back to the North Carolina debacle and PETAs handling of unwanted dogs and cats: PETA claims that it tries to find good homes for the stray cats and dogs it obtains. But one wonders how hard PETA tries. According to official records dug out by the Center for Consumer Freedom the food-industry-financed organization that may be PETAs foremost political opponent in 2003, of the 2,224 dogs and cats PETA received for placement, only 312 (14 percent) ended up in homes. All but one of the remaining animals were killed. This has been a consistent pattern for years. The Center noted that between 1998 and 2003, PETA took in 13,021 animals. Of these, it killed 10,195, with 2,540 adopted and 261 transferred.
Packed, stacked and out the door in under 4.
It still boggles my mind that an awful lot of them just chose to sit there and "wait it out".
Surely they have TVs in NO.
The satellite images of Katrina freaked me out and I'm so far away from "hurricane country" that it's not even funny.
I had my go-gear ready just in case a peripheral deluge brought nasty flash flooding down from the mountains.
Turns out we didn't get more than a sprinkle this time.
.......you just HAD to ask, didn't you?
Some did take their pets and had their pets taken from them to be dropped by the roadside. What of those people?
Separate issue. In those cases, NO should locate those animals and make sure they are reunited. At NO's expense.
Those others, do the dog a favor,shoot it, and send the owner to court for cruelty to animals.
I saw how some were chained up on 3 feet of chain. Their owners should have at least set them loose.
OK, I take back my assertation that you are a leftist. I was wrong (or else you are a darn good actor!)
But I still think it is a mistake to base your opinions of feelings like you are doing on this issue. it is dangerous and misguided.
Also, I take issue with you promoting the radical left wing website. But seemingly that is OK here on FR. So I will back off on that one.
I'm still curious as to why my posts were somehow more offensive than posts 2 through 4, and were consequently deleted.
Those early posts said essentially the same thing as I said, I just expanded on the theme and my personal beliefs.
Dear Admin Mod: Please FReepmail me so I can better understand the board guidelines and comply.
I spent considerable thought and effort on those comments and would appreciate a considerate reply.
Stand up and be heard. It's the American way. Many of the early Patriots lost their lives, liberty, and family that way.
Based on a line from a skit on SNL where they lampooned Blue Oyster Cult.
[Christopher Walken at his deranged best]...:)
Watch it here if you have a fast connection;
Google "more cowbell".
You'll be amazed....LOL!
Stop stalking me.
LOL... Like I said, I'm exhausted, so I'm a little slower than you are. But I gave him the "I'm done" post at 121. :-)
And BTW, yes, noahswish.org seems to be the best way to go for donations.
What "tough talk?" I only saw one of those, and he's piped down. I haven't noted anyone here that isn't an animal lover, but that doesn't mean they don't see the cost/benefit ratio on this idea as foolhardy.
"I saw how some were chained up on 3 feet of chain"
Does LA have a felony animal cruelty law?
Hurricanes or no hurricanes, that is purely an evil thing to do to a dog.
The mindset in question is based on cold reality and facts. Not feeling.
The opposition you see on this thread is in reaction to a touchy feely response to the problem at hand.
Cold reality sometimes dictates that you put your feelings aside to do the best thing for something that you have responsibility for. Like shooting a dog.
My feelings would never let me shoot a dog. But cold reality has at times demanded that I do it in the best interests of the dog.
But the main thing in play on this thread is 2 opposing philosophies. One says a pet is equal to a human. The other say no way!